Two years after Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump, Jill Biden is attempting to rescue both her husband’s reputation and his political legacy. In her new memoir, the former first lady offers two remarkable explanations for the night that effectively ended his campaign: perhaps he had been drugged or perhaps he was suffering a stroke.
The performance helped force Biden from the race, leaving Kamala Harris to take his place and lose to Trump. Now Jill wants to “set the record straight”. Instead, she has revived the question Democrats spent years trying to suppress: What, exactly, was wrong with Joe Biden?
The Night It All Fell Apart
On the evening of 27 June 2024, President Joe Biden attempted to debate candidate Donald Trump. But within minutes, highly paid strategists for the Democratic Party must have entered panic mode: Millions of people were watching Biden verbally stumble and mess up basic talking points. It was as if every sentence he uttered provided the perfect snippet for a convincing Republican attack advertisement. Rather than project the image of a powerful and energetic leader, he appeared as a bewildered and overwhelmed patient who had mistakenly walked onto the stage.
Now, I can vaguely remember a post on social media that jeered that Biden had raised awareness of Alzheimer’s, while another joked that he might be violating campaign finance laws by failing to declare that the performance was an advertisement for senior residential facilities. We know today, as a result of her new memoir, that Jill Biden herself wondered during the event whether Biden needed medical attention: She thought that he might have been drugged, or maybe he was suffering from a stroke.
The Party Closes Ranks
The debate concluded, and Biden had inadvertently united the country: It was undeniable that he was unfit to be the president, let alone serve another term. No artful narrative could do sufficient damage control to restore confidence in Biden, so the media, even outlets that were firmly progressive and regularly condemned Trump as disgustingly “unpresidential”, readily conceded that the president’s debate performance was appallingly bad. Since the election was just months away, the talking heads immediately pushed for an alternative Democratic Party candidate.
In fact, the very first commentator to speak during CNN’s post-debate coverage raised the possibility that Biden should “step aside”. The second commentator agreed, noting that Biden was "not coherent" during the debate, and another said his performance was “an unmitigated disaster”. While they attempted to discredit Trump by alluding to his “lies”, the resounding consensus was that he won.
Yet Biden clung to power, while the Democratic establishment tried to downplay the incident as a one-off mishap. Biden personally admitted that “I don't speak as smoothly as I used to, I don't debate as well as I used to”, then insisted “I know how to do this job”. When speaking to reporters elsewhere, he dismissed concerns about the debate by saying “I think we did well”.
Obama at least acknowledged that the debate was lousy, telling the public that “bad debate nights happen”. Still, he continued to endorse Biden, writing that “this election is still a choice between someone who has fought for ordinary folks his entire life and someone who only cares about himself”.
California Governor Gavin Newsom, who was and is still seen as a top contender for the White House, defended Biden and said: “I will never turn my back on President Biden. … I don't know a Democrat in my party that would do so.” Vice President Kamala Harris suggested that Biden had merely had a “slow start”, then dubiously asserted that he is “extraordinarily strong”.
Biden eventually withdrew from the race in July, resulting in a new ticket with Harris, who is equally incoherent and led a campaign that was as disastrous as his debate performance.
Jill Biden’s Version of Events
While Democrats and Republicans alike might prefer to forget the Biden administration altogether, a new voice has just chimed in with an unpleasant reminder of those shameful years. The Atlantic published an article with a damning headline about the former first lady’s new memoir: “Jill Biden Worried Her Husband Was Drugged on Debate Night”.
In Jill’s words, the book is an attempt to “set the record straight”, but it is essentially a protracted justification of Joe’s one-term presidency. She summarizes the concerns she had that fateful evening in June: “Oh God—will people watching assume this is how he is all the time?” Not only did Jill question whether he had been drugged, she apparently wondered whether he was having a serious medical episode.
Jill concedes that Joe had embarrassing moments, but rather unbelievably, she seemingly frames them as uncharacteristic and unexplainable random incidents that were not signs of senility.
The Decline Did Not Begin That Night
But that might amount to what progressives describe as “disinformation”. Any post-mortem analysis of Biden’s presidency cannot avoid mentioning that pivotal debate, and it is absurd to argue that the public erroneously perceived cognitive decline. More crucially, though, it is farcical to suggest that Biden’s concerning behavior first manifested on that debate stage.
Right-leaning outlets had repeatedly noted that Biden’s mental acuity was bad and worsening. There is plenty of reporting on the topic from the early days of his presidency. And consider just one National Review article by Jeffrey Blehar that is aptly titled “Joe Biden’s Mental Decay Is Not Just Obvious, It’s Accelerating”, which was published in 2023.
The Media’s Convenient Blindness
Yet high-profile pundits at big-name outlets contended throughout his four years in office that President Biden was both agile and competent, further rejecting concerns as unfounded, irrelevant or even conspiratorial. A CNN host declared in 2022 that “The gears of [Biden’s] mind are working, that’s an issue pushed by right-wing media, but it’s not correct”. An MSNBC host said in March 2024: “This version of Biden, intellectually, analytically is the best Biden ever.” The propaganda effort fell just short of arguing that Biden aced trigonometry tests in his mind while he slept.
While Jill’s memoir is not a “must-read”, it does provide the American right wing with an opportunity to revitalize its earlier arguments, specifically that the media and elites promulgated obvious falsehoods about Biden’s abilities, and some only admitted the truth once the evidence could be neither censored nor “debunked”.
But there is a much more daunting question we should pose: Who was actually running the executive branch during Biden’s presidency?